ArticleBMC health services research2017
Money's (not) on my mind: a qualitative study of how staff and managers understand health care's triple Aim.
Article in BMC health services research, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
17 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 37 citations in OpenAlex.
- The development of the concept of return-on-investment from large-scale quality improvement programmes in healthcare: an integrative systematic literature review.BMC health services research · 2022Pooled it
- Identifying health economic competencies for quality improvement practitioners and educators: a mixed-methods study.BMJ open quality · 2026Article
- Tailoring a specific medical leadership development program for faculty members: the Lyon-Ottawa experience.Medical education online · 2024Article
- A Patient-Driven Mobile Health Innovation in Cystic Fibrosis Care: Comparative Cross-Case Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2024Article
- Implementing high-value, cost-conscious care: experiences of Irish doctors and the role of education in facilitating this approach.BMC medical education · 2024Article
- How is return on investment from quality improvement programmes conceptualised by mental healthcare leaders and why: a qualitative study.BMC health services research · 2023Review
- Who counts when health counts? A case-study of multi-stakeholder initiative to promote value-creation in Swedish healthcare.Health services management research · 2023Article
- How hospital top managers reason about the central leadership task of balancing quality of patient care, economy and professionals' engagement: an interview study.Leadership in health services (Bradford, England) · 2022Article
- Harnessing a clinician-led governance model to overcome healthcare tribalism and drive innovation: a case study of Northumbria NHS Foundation Trust.Journal of health organization and management · 2022Article
- Doctors as Resource Stewards? Translating High-Value, Cost-Conscious Care to the Consulting Room.Health care analysis : HCA : journal of health philosophy and policy · 2022Article
- Communication Skills and Transformational Leadership Style of First-Line Nurse Managers in Relation to Job Satisfaction of Nurses and Moderators of This Relationship.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
- How to design, implement and evaluate organizational interventions for maximum impact: the Sigtuna Principles.European journal of work and organizational psychology · 2021Article
- How can technology support quality improvement? Lessons learned from the adoption of an analytics tool for advanced performance measurement in a hospital unit.BMC health services research · 2020Article
- Medical leadership: boon or barrier to organisational performance? A thematic synthesis of the literature.BMJ open · 2020Review
- Make it complicated: a qualitative study utilizing a complexity framework to explain improvement in health care.BMC health services research · 2019Article
- Ready for the Triple Aim? Perspectives on organizational readiness for implementing change from a Danish obstetrics and gynecology department.BMC health services research · 2019Article
- Assessing the reliability and validity of the Danish version of Organizational Readiness for Implementing Change (ORIC).Implementation science : IS · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe "Triple Aim" - provision of a better care experience and improved population health at a lower cost - may be theoretically sound, but paradoxical in practice as it forces together the logics of management and medicine. The aim of this study was to explore how staff and managers understand the change imperative inherent to the Triple Aim and the mental models underlying their understanding.
methodsThis qualitative study builds on thirty semi-structured interviews conducted with managers, nurses, midwives, medical secretaries, and physicians at a department of Gynecology and Obstetrics in Denmark who successfully cut costs through staff and bed reductions and, from what we can ascertain, maintained care quality. Mental models were articulated from a content analysis of the interviews.
resultsStaff and managers identified with the different dimensions of the Triple Aim along classic professional divides, i.e. nurses and midwives focused on patient experience, physicians on health outcomes, and manager on all three. Underlying these, we found four mental models. The understanding of change was guided by a Professional ethos (inner drive to improve care) and a Socio-political discourse (external requirement to become more efficient) mental model. The understanding of economics was guided by a You-get-what-you-pay-for and by a More-bang-for-the-buck mental model. A complex interplay could be discerned between all four, which led staff to see the Triple Aim as a dilemma between quality and economics and a threat to clinical care and quality, whereas managers saw it as a paradox that invited improvement efforts. Despite these differences, managers chose a change strategy in line with staff mental models.
conclusionsThe practical challenges inherent to the Triple Aim may be symptomatic of the interactions between the different mental models that guide staff and managers' understanding and choice of change strategies. Pursuit of quality improvement in the face of financial constraints (the essence of the Triple Aim) may be facilitated through conscious exploration of these empirically identified mental models. Managers might do well to translate the socio-political discourse into a change process that resonates with the mental models held by staff.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.